Environmental News

Links

Transatlantic Environmental Policy

In the past ten years, Europe and the United States have seen a divergence in their respective approaches to the environment. The United States has been hesitant to join the rest of the world in setting time tables and quotas for the reduction of green house gas (GHG) emissions. Largely the result of industrial manufacturing and personal automobiles, the world’s main sources of energy – petroleum and coal – are two of the world’s largest GHG emitters. This difference became most pronounced when President George Bush said in 2001 that the United States would never sign the Kyoto treaty.

The Kyoto treaty was drawn up in 1997 to create international standards for industrialized countries to reduce emissions of GHG’s, particularly carbon dioxide. Much of the rest of the industrialized world went ahead with the treaty in 2003, and it will take effect in 2008 with the support of 169 nations. Europe is regarded as leading the way in environmental policy. Every EU country has signed the Kyoto treaty. In February 2005, the EU enacted an emissions trading scheme in which industrial GHG producers can buy and sell permits that allow them to pollute. It provides economic incentive to run more environmentally friendly production facilities by making high polluters pay and allowing low emitters make a profit by selling their emissions credits. The trading scheme was designed as a mechanism for Europe to meet its Kyoto treating obligations by 2012.

With German Prime Minister Angela Merkel holding the presidency of the European Union for the next 6 months (Jan. 2007-July 2007) as well as heading the group of 8 of the world’s most industrialized countries (G8), transatlantic issues are at the forefront of EU policy. The prime minister has made climate change central to her engagement with the United States , often stating that for any global environmental policy to have any positive effect, it has to have the support of the United States as well as China and India . For an environmental impact, all three of those countries have to abide by international environmental standards; and for any agreement to have political clout, it is imperative that the United States is on board.

The EU would like to extend its emissions trading scheme across the Atlantic , to include the United States , and eventually the rest of the world. European law makers are also looking ahead to 2012, when the Kyoto treaty expires. A dialogue has begun between the EU and US, initiated with Angela Merkel’s visit to the United States on January 4, 2007 , on what should be done post-2012. No policy initiates have been made, but there is widespread agreement that all major industrial countries should, and will, participate on an international agreement.

Merkel and other European leaders were inspired by President Bush’s remarks about climate change in his 2007 state of the union address. On one hand, it signifies that the United States accepts that climate change is occurring and something has to be done to prevent its drastic effects with Bush’s stated goal of a 20% reduction in emissions by 2020. On the other hand, it showed Washington ’s continued divergence with European policy, by focusing on high technology development, research and development, and energy security, rather than emissions caps, reduction targets, and international cooperation. Congressional initiatives are also underway for tougher policies, potentially bringing the U.S. and Europe closer together. Climate Change was the central topic at the 2007 World Economic Forum held in Davos , Switzerland. Many world business and political leaders spoke about the need for immediate action to address climate change, including Germany ’s Angela Merkel and British Prime Minister Tony Blair. The forum focused on the use of free market mechanisms to address environmental policy, one of the results being that businesses and corporations, both American and European, seem poised to lead the way in clean environmental practices. Adding more credence to the issue is a report released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The report, signed by 2,500 scientists from 113 countries, clearly states that both climate change is happening and will have severe consequences, and that climate change is most likely the result of human activity. With the German initiative, the publicity of the World Economic Forum, and the credence of the IPCC report, the issue has gained tremendous momentum.

As the world’s two largest trading partners, the need for Europe and the United States to cooperate on environmental policy is pronounced. Events in the last six months have been building political momentum for this, opening up a new space in which Atlantic initiatives have prospect of bearing fruit. Momentum is likely to continue building for this until the G-8 summit in Germany in June.

2007 Legislation

In January and Febraury of 2007, several important pieces of legislation have been introduced in both the United States Senate and House of Representatives. They represent a recognition that the government must play an active and aggressive role in stemming the tide of climate change, as well as signaling the the U.S. is focusing on international cooperation.

Bill # S.280 (Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act of 2007)introduced by Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) is the most aggressive and most similar to the European Union emissions trading scheme enacted in January of 2005. The bill, which has received bipartisan sponsorship, calls for a trading scheme in which the government will issue credits for the emission of green house gases (GHGs). Firms that emit less GHGs than they have credit for will be able to sell their credits to other firms that emit more than their own credits allow. Firms that produce pollutants more than they have credit for will be taxed based on the amount of pollutants they release. It's attraction is that it creates a market for pollution credit, thus applying free market forces on the problem of climate change.

Bill # S.309 (A bill to amend the Clean Air Act to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, and for other purposes) Introducted by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and co-sponsored by 11 democracts and 1 independent, takes a more regulatory approach to climate change policy. It directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set limits on net levels of emissions by taking a market based approach. This means that the EPA will be issuing the credits for an emissions trading scheme based on research of which it is in charge. The EPA will also be in charge of setting guidelines for the energy industry for emissions reduction. The bill also will require the automotive industry to meet emissions reduction standards by 2016. Other powers of regulatory enforcement are given to the Department of Commerce and Security and Exchange Commission. The bill is similar to the one sponsored by Senator Lieberman (S.208) in that it calls for an emissions trading scheme, but it takes a more comprehensive approach and allocates more implementation power to various government agencies.

The Reverend Jesse Jackson (D-IL) has proposed a bill that would add an ammendment to the U.S. constitution that guarantees the right to a safe, clean, and sustainable environment. Bill #H.J Res33

Bill # H.R. 204 (The Right to Know About Airport Pollution Act) This bill aims to study, reduce, and make transparent the pollution in areas around commercial airports. It charges the Environmental protection agency with studying the impact of commericial airports on the surrounding areas and determining if efforts should be made to reduce the emissions of airplanes. It also requires that all information about pollution from airports be made available to the public.

Bill # H.R. 792 (Growing Responsible Energy and Environment Nationally Through Federal Energy Decision Act) This legislation would ammend the Energy Policy Act of 1992, and would require that in areas where ethanol blended gasoline is price competitive, nearby government agencies purchase 10% of this fuel for agency cars. It also stipulates that all government agencies should use 20% alternative fuels in 10 years.